My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
CCMIN040699
City of Pleasanton
>
CITY CLERK
>
MINUTES
>
1990-1999
>
1999
>
CCMIN040699
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
5/26/2010 10:53:17 AM
Creation date
5/14/1999 11:02:12 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CITY CLERK
CITY CLERK - TYPE
MINUTES
DOCUMENT DATE
4/6/1999
DESTRUCT DATE
PERMANENT
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
27
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
Mr. Swift said the sidewalk is currently open. <br /> <br /> Gary Smith said the Building Code required pedestrian protection while the construction on <br />the roof was going on. He felt the fence could be removed at this time. <br /> <br /> Ms. Churka said the fence has to remain until the brick is installed along the front. <br /> <br /> Ms. Ayala asked if the delay on the project has been the City' s fault. <br /> <br /> Mr. Smith said whenever a project is an owner/builder project; staff tends to spend more <br />time reviewing the plans, approvals, inspections, etc. <br /> <br /> Ms. Acosta said staff has spent more time on this project than any other project. <br /> <br /> Ms. Michelotti understood the fencing around the perimeter only secured the from and one <br />of the sides of the building. <br /> <br /> Mr. Swift said there would be a gate at the parking lot entrance to the building and the patio <br />area would be screened along three sides. <br /> <br /> Ms. Michelotti understood the patio would be totally enclosed. <br /> <br /> Mr. Swift said that is correct. <br /> <br /> Ms. Michelotti suggested instead of building an enclosure, to build a brick fence with <br />wrought iron sitting on top of it. This change would make the fence/enclosure more user friendly <br />for the downtown area. <br /> <br /> Mr. Pico appreciated the comments but the time to redesign the plan is past. He felt it was <br />time to move this project forward. <br /> <br /> Ms. Dennis was sympathetic to Mr. Hovingh's appeal because she felt the original <br />window treatment was more attractive. But she did not feel the minor change was worth causing <br />all the windows to be changed. <br /> <br /> Ms. Ayala said she is trying to be consistent with the conditions of approval and that the <br />applicants will do what they agree to do. She said there was a considerable discussion about the <br />windows at the Planning Commission and during the discussion it was hard to decide what to do <br />about the windows. She was surprised that Mr. Churka did not want to put on the final touches <br />that would make an extraordinary building. She also said the fence was not six feet tall originally. <br />She felt it would be better to see the people rather than just the tops of their heads. She said the <br />original plan has wood trim on all the comers of the building. She hated to see the building not <br /> <br />Pleasanton City Council 18 04/6/99 <br />Minutes <br /> <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.